The social impact of Mobility
as a Service (MaaS)
An assessment of the business models of MaaS-initiatives and the inequalities in the Dutch transportation system
Michiel Brouwer, s4237943 Master thesis Spatial Planning:
Urban and Regional Mobility Nijmegen School of Management
Radboud University Peraphan Jittrapirom
II
Colophon
Title: The social impact of Mobility as a Service (MaaS)
Subtitle: An assessment of the business models of MaaS-initiatives and the inequalities in the Dutch transportation system
Author: Michiel Brouwer Student number: s4237943
Email: michielbrouwer@live.nl
Phone number: +31630198902
Date: 15-02-2019
Status: Final version Internship location: Sweco (Eindhoven)
Supervisor: Peraphan Jittrapirom (Radboud University Nijmegen)
Cover picture: MaaS global, 2017. Obtained from: https://www.connekt.nl/wp- content/uploads/2017/06/Actieplan-MaaS-2017.pdf
Key terms: MaaS, accessibility for all, business models, (in)equality, social justice. Word count: 21.867 words
IV
Preface
This is my master thesis about the potential social impact of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and the equality of the Dutch transportation system. This research marks the completion of the master’s degree program of Spatial Planning with a specialization in Urban and Regional Mobility. Of course, research of this size cannot be established without the help of others. I would like to dedicate this preface to thank a few people for their help in the process.
First of all, a few people within Sweco deserve an honorable mention. Sweco provided me with a very valuable opportunity to both write my thesis and gain relevant experience in the working field by working on projects. I would like to thank Willem Scheper for this opportunity. Furthermore, I would like to thank Rudy Stevens for teaching me multiple skills in the field of traffic engineering, which broadened my skill set as a spatial planner. Lastly, Jeroen Quee helped me with further narrowing down my research focus with his extraordinary knowledge regarding MaaS.
Then I would also like to thank Peraphan Jittrapirom as my supervisor from Radboud University. Like Jeroen Quee, he possesses exceptional knowledge regarding the subject of MaaS which really helped me in the initial phases of this research. In the latter phases of this research, I could always rely on his constructive and helpful feedback.
Some people within my personal life deserve an honorable mention also. I would like to thank my father Egbert, my brother Thijs and my girlfriend Jip, for supporting me in the process. Also, I would like to thank my mother, Marianne, who sadly is not around anymore, but who always helped me to succeed. Without the four of you, this would have never been possible.
Finally, I want to thank my other family, friends and my teammates from Brakkenstein football club. I could always count on you to provide some much-needed distraction and a beer or two, which is much appreciated.
Enjoy reading my master thesis! Michiel Brouwer
Nijmegen, February 2019.
V
Abstract
The Dutch public transportation system is considered to be of high quality (Mebius, 2017), but groups like the elderly, the disabled, people with low income and people living in rural areas are most likely still experiencing problems with accessing the Dutch transportation system. Mobility as a Service (MaaS), a novel transport concept, can be an answer to these challenges, given the
precondition that a MaaS service embeds social values in its business model to address inequalities within the transport system. In this study, I examine how the existing MaaS services, namely Whim, GoAbout, USP Campusbikes and Brengflex, incorporate social values in their business model. The study adopts Transport Justice (Martens, 2016) as its theoretical framework and uses the Triple Layered Business Model Canvas (TLBMC) (Joyce & Paquin, 2016) to construct a social business model canvas for MaaS.
The results of this study show that the existing MaaS-initiatives generally do not apply a social business model. Most MaaS-initiatives do not focus on reducing inequalities in the Dutch transportation system by providing a better service for the groups of people that currently experience an insufficient level of accessibility. Instead, the dominant value in the business model remains the economic value. Only the business model of Brengflex, a subsidized flexible bus line, can be considered social. All other MaaS-initiatives simply cannot afford to apply a social focus as the competitiveness of the mobility market is very high and profit margins are slim.
The results imply that the government has an important role in ensuring accessibility for all.
Principles of justice should be implemented in the transportation planning policy, as is done in other policy areas such as housing, health care and education. It is important that the government
considers a sufficient level of accessibility as a basic need. Having a sufficient level of accessibility enables people to access health care, jobs, social contacts and educational institutions.
Governmental regulation of MaaS-initiatives can be done by setting up rules that force these initiatives to have a broader focus than just profit-making in order to fulfill the accessibility goals of the government. Subsidies can make sure that these MaaS-initiatives will still be profitable while also focusing on loss-making transport lines.
VI
Table of content
Preface ... IV Abstract ... V Table of content ... VI 1. Introduction ...1 1.1. Background ...11.2. Research aim and questions ...5
1.3. Research relevance ...6
1.3.1. Scientific relevance ...6
1.3.2. Societal relevance ...7
2. Theoretical framework ...9
2.1. Transport Justice and its implications to transport planning practice ...9
2.2.1. Operationalizing a social business model canvas for MaaS ... 13
2.3. Linking Transport Justice and the Social Business Model... 17
2.4. Conceptual model ... 20
3. Methodology ... 22
3.1. Research strategy and methods ... 22
3.2. Data collection and data analysis ... 24
3.3. Validity and reliability of the research ... 25
4. Case Study of MaaS and MaaS services in the Netherlands ... 27
4.1. Whim ... 27 4.1.1 Background information ... 27 4.1.2. Interview: Whim ... 28 4.2. GoAbout... 29 4.2.1. Background information ... 29 4.2.2. Interview: GoAbout ... 30 4.3. USP Campusbikes ... 33 4.3.1. Background information ... 33
4.3.2. Interview: USP Campusbikes ... 33
4.4. Brengflex ... 35
4.4.1. Background information ... 35
4.4.2. Interview: Brengflex ... 36
5. Analysis of results and discussion ... 39
VII
5.2. Analyzing the socialness of GoAbout ... 40
5.3. Analyzing the socialness of the USP Campusbikes ... 42
5.4. Analyzing the socialness of Brengflex ... 43
5.5. Discussing MaaS business models ... 45
5.5.1. Explaining the lack of social focus ... 45
5.5.2. Desired role of government ... 46
6. Conclusion ... 49
6.1. Research questions ... 49
6.2. Critical reflection ... 53
6.2.1. Research design ... 53
6.2.2. Contribution to existing theories ... 55
6.3. Recommendations ... 56
7. References ... 57
Appendix 1. Accessibility vs Mobility ... 64
Appendix 2. Interview guides ... 66
1
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
The Dutch public transportation system is considered to be of high quality when compared on an international level in terms of punctuality and frequency of the service (Mebius, 2017). A train departs every ten minutes between big cities, which is more frequent than any other country
(Mebius, 2017). Furthermore, the recent implementation of the ‘OV-chipkaart’, which is the national public transportation card, enabled users to access different modes of transport such as trains, buses, trams, metros and shared bicycles, using a single smart ticket.
The Dutch bicycle system is another factor that stands out when analyzing the quality of the Dutch transportation network. There is a highly developed and intensively used bicycle infrastructure in the Netherlands. Distances between cities are relatively short and densities, especially around bigger cities, are really high, which makes most areas and destinations very accessible by foot or bicycle. The combination of these characteristics makes the Dutch transportation system of high quality, in which people generally will not experience any problems when moving around and reaching their destination.
However, even though the Dutch transport system is of high quality, there are certain groups of people that still experience challenges in their travels. For example, citizens in rural areas often experience a lack of accessibility as there is stagnation, and sometimes even a decrease of the quality of public transport between smaller cities, outskirts of cities and rural areas (Rover, 2016), which leads to a high car-dependency. This can give accessibility problems when these people do not have access to a car, because they cannot afford one or when they are incapable of driving a car.
Furthermore, it is important to consider that a car is not always the most efficient transport option, for instance, because of heavy traffic, road work or the inability to park at the destination. The lack of public transport service towards rural areas can thus lead to a lack of accessibility for people living in these areas several situations.
Furthermore, the elderly and those with physical disabilities often experience challenges to use the public transport system due to their physical limitations. They simply lack the capabilities to walk or cycle to the closest access points to public transport service (Welzen, 2014). In other cases, while the distance to these transport services may not pose a challenge, the service itself is not accessible due to the lack of necessary facilities, such as wheelchair access (Rijksoverheid, 2017).
2
Although the Netherlands is considered a wealthy and developed nation, there are currently 221.000 Dutch households (3,3%) living below the poverty line for a long-term1 period (Nu.nl, 2017). This
poverty line has been defined by the government as the level of income “sufficient to realize a certain consumption level that is seen as minimally necessary in the Netherlands” (CBS, 2017). In addition to their ability to afford access to transport, there are also several pre-conditions to access the transport system that can potentially hinder the poor from accessing the system. For example, to acquire an OV-chipkaart, each traveler is required to have a home address, a bank account and access to the internet. These requirements demonstrate examples of implicit challenges for the poor and those with low incomes to access the Dutch transport system.
Mobility as a Service is new and innovative transport concept, thought to be a transition in mobility, in which the consumer buys mobility, instead of investing in ‘owning’ modes of transport, such as the car (Connekt, 2017). The aim of MaaS is to offer an integrated platform, in which all modes of
transport, including conventional public transport, on-demand transport and private or shared vehicles are combined (Hietanen & Sahala, 2014). With MaaS, all transport modes are combined to offer the consumer a tailored mobility package (Jittrapirom et al., 2017).
This bundling of mobility modes can start a shift from an ownership-based transport system towards an access-based one (Jittrapirom et al., 2017). The potential effects of this transition is a transport system that is more flexible, affordable, and as convenient as owning a private vehicle (Hietanen & Sahala, 2014). If successful, MaaS would make private car ownership unnecessary. The integrated platform in MaaS will be accessible for travelers through a Smartphone app. This app can then be used to plan, order and pay for the desired transportation. MaaS can potentially provide the
consumer with a more responsive and more efficient transport system (Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, 2017).
There are a few key driving forces behind the rise of MaaS. The first one is reliability. MaaS can offer a more reliable and flexible transport system (Connekt, 2017), because the user is no longer relying on only one mode of transport, but instead, this person can use multiple modes of transport. The possibility to use different modes of transport gives a lot of flexibility to the user. It means that when one mode of transport is not an efficient option on a given day, for instance, because of congestion due to heavy traffic or because of problems with the train, it is possible to switch to another mode of transport. With the current transportation system, this person would be either stuck in traffic or waiting for another train. MaaS can provide consumers with alternatives which will make their travel
3
time more consistent, and this will give travelers more certainty that they will reach their destination on time.
Efficiency is another important driving force. This driving force of efficiency consists of two parts. The first part is concentrated on the more efficient use of available cars. Currently, a privately owned car is standing still for 96% of the time (Connekt, 2017). MaaS can use this fleet of cars more efficiently, which can than result in a reduction of the fleet of cars needed to transport all people towards their destination. A smaller fleet of cars would mean less parking space needed, which opens up space for other things, such as green structures in a neighborhood. At the same time, the remaining fleet of cars can be used more efficiently, which can lead to less peak travel and less congestion (Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, 2017). With MaaS, people can also choose for a last-minute switch from a congested transport mode to a transport mode that has still free spaces, for instance from (shared) car to public transport or vice versa.
The driving force of efficiency is also important from an economic point of view. Mobility is currently the biggest expense of a Dutch household (Connekt, 2017). The flexibility and comfort level of an adequately implemented MaaS-system should make it unnecessary to privately own a car. MaaS can increase the accessibility for households while decreasing the transport related expenses.
Given the mentioned attractive benefits of MaaS, MaaS can improve the Dutch transportation system’s accessibility, making it inclusive for all. There are a number of reasons the Netherlands can be considered a suitable country to implement MaaS (Connekt, 2017). Firstly, the OV-chipkaart provides a strong basis for the integration of payment in the Dutch transport system. The OV-card integrates different modes of transport and enables a pay-as-you-go tariff, which is a relatively similar system as MaaS. This means that potential users are already used to the idea and implementing MaaS would require fewer adjustments to the transportation system.
Secondly, the relatively dense cities, short distances and the extensive use of the bicycle are other reasons to consider the Netherlands as a possible test area for MaaS. On top of that the Netherlands always had a progressive view in the field of transportation innovations and tries to be one of the frontrunners (Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, 2017), and it is therefore expected that the Dutch government will explore the possibilities and opportunities of a transportation system including MaaS in the near future.
Furthermore, MaaS could treat some challenges and threats the Dutch transportation system faces, which will further stimulate the Dutch government to explore the possibilities of MaaS. For instance,
4
the Netherlands is experiencing increasing pressure on its road network, leading to a high level of congestion during peak hours. The level of congestion is expected to worsen in the coming years. The National Market and Capacity Analysis (NMCA) shows that the number of travel movements in, around and between Dutch cities will keep on growing (Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, 2017). This increasing pressure on the Dutch road network presents the government with large-scale accessibility- and sustainability challenge. The Dutch infrastructure network is reaching its maximum capacity, especially around cities (Metronieuws, 2017). This means that there has to be put more effort into alternative solutions, apart from investing in public transport and infrastructure, in order to prevent high levels of congestion on the Dutch road system.
Also, the Netherlands is facing a shrinking of its regional cities, due to a decline in population in the rural area. In these shrinking areas, the demand for transport decreases and becomes more inconsistent. Currently, buses are used to provide transport in rural areas. However, conventional (public) transport services, such as the bus or train, are not suitable to support such a low and inconsistent demand. This makes it unattractive for bus companies to cover rural areas, which has led to the disappearance of several bus lines (Omroep Gelderland, 2014). People living in these areas are thus no longer connected to the public transport network and rely solely on private transport to reach desired activities.
The implementation of MaaS in the Netherlands is likely to have significant impacts at the spatial and social level. MaaS can bring a significant change to the transport system, reducing the need for a private vehicle and enables travelers to utilize public transport system more effectively (Hietanen & Sahala, 2014). This research focuses on the change that MaaS brings. At the moment there is not a lot known about the consequences of MaaS, as this is a relatively new subject. This research is focused on taking a closer look at these consequences. In particular, the social dimension. This perspective is chosen for two main reasons.
Firstly, there is a lack of literature in the area in dealing with the implications of MaaS on a social scale. Existing literature on MaaS (such as; Goodall et al., 2017; Sochor, Strömberg & Karlsson, 2015) recognizes the importance of a social focus. However, these studies do not explicitly deal with the social impacts of MaaS. Given the inequalities in the current transportation system, it is important to look deeper into possible social consequences of MaaS that can make a future transport system more equal.
Secondly, the concept of MaaS stems from the recognition that the organization of a transport system should be focused on the people. When looking at current literature on MaaS, a lot has been
5
said on how MaaS will make the transportation system more efficient, flexible, comfortable, and eventually better for all people (Hietanen & Sahala, 2014; Connekt, 2017). This should include people that currently experience problems with accessing transport services. MaaS has the potential to improve travel for all groups of people, and not just for people that live in the right place and who can afford it.
Finally, the impact that MaaS will have on society will be strongly dependent on the business model that is adopted, and what key values are determined in the business model canvas. A business model canvas is a tool for describing, analyzing and designing business models (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). It describes the strategy of an organization in developing, delivering and capturing value. The impact that a business has on society as a whole will always be very dependent on the values that are embedded in the business model canvas.
For instance, when MaaS adopts a business model that is focused on the value of profit-making then this will most likely only increase the inequalities in the transport system as it will improve the gap between the rich and the poor. Furthermore, adopting such an economic-focused business model, MaaS is likely to overlook the accessibility issues in rural areas, as providing a service in these areas is likely to be unprofitable. In other words, for MaaS to have positive social effects, additional values than the economic one should be embedded in its business model canvas. The question is whether it can be expected that MaaS-initiatives will implement social values into their business models
themselves or if this requires regulation of some kind from the government. This research aims to answer this question.
1.2. Research aim and questions
The aim of this research is to provide insights into the social dimension of the current business model of MaaS services and to identify possible improvements using Transport Justice as a framework to realize the desired social effects in the Dutch transportation system. This research will focus on the Dutch transport system as its case study.
Furthermore, this research will be focused on the main research question, which is as follows; “What kind of business model should Mobility as a Service adopt in order to have the desired social effects that lead to a more ‘equal’ or ‘just’ transport system in the Netherlands and how can this be achieved?”
6
In order to answer the main research question, the following sub-questions will be addressed:
1. What are the characteristics of a just and inclusive transport system and how can this be achieved using a social business model?
2. How do existing MaaS-initiatives address or influence the social dimensions of the transport system and what are possible enhancements?
1.3. Research relevance
1.3.1. Scientific relevance
Given its innovative nature, there is currently limited scientific literature on MaaS. Nevertheless, there is an emergence of literature on the subjects as the concept become increasingly well-known and a number of MaaS-pilots are being implemented. Hietanen (2014) first introduced MaaS and its possibilities, providing an overview of how the system could potentially be better than owning a car and how it could address accessibility issues in the region of Helsinki.
Holmberg, Collado, Sarasini & Williander (2016) later gave a comprehensive description of the framework of MaaS, including an explanation of the MaaS concept, giving examples of MaaS,
describing the role MaaS can play in the eco-system and doing recommendations for future research. Furthermore, Jittrapirom et al. (2017) give a critical review of definitions, assessments of schemes and key challenges for MaaS. In this research, nine core characteristics of MaaS are given based on a literature review.
However, to the best of my knowledge, there are only a handful of studies that focus on the business model aspects of MaaS. For instance, Sarasini, Sochor & Arby (2017) examine how business models for MaaS can generate sustainable value, the value that goes further than traditional economic value and belongs to the environmental or social dimension of sustainability. The research concluded that MaaS can create and capture sustainable value in numerous ways, including reduced congestion and emissions, improved accessibility, reduced environmental impacts in vehicles’ production phase and travel time savings. This research is perhaps the only study that explicitly focuses on the formulation of a business model for MaaS. The lack of literature addressing the business models for MaaS illustrates a knowledge gap in the subject, which this research can contribute to.
In addition, there is also a lack of literature that explicitly addresses the role of the government in MaaS. The Dutch government is responsible for its transportation network and in providing accessibility for the people. It is still unclear what the effects of MaaS will be to the level of accessibility of a given area. Will it bring about improvements for those currently experiencing
7
accessibility problems to reach their desired locations in the current transport system? Or will it intensify the problems of these groups? What is the role of the government in ensuring that all people have access to the transportation system under the MaaS concept? This research also aims to answer these questions to contribute to building knowledge about the desired role of the
government in the implementation of MaaS.
Furthermore, there is a lack of scientific knowledge on the social inequalities in the Dutch transportation system, even though numerous groups of people experience them, as previously mentioned in the introduction section. The most important research considering equality in transport is Martens’ (2016) concept of Transport Justice. This research will use the principles of Transport Justice to address the equality of the Dutch transport system. The aim is to identify possible improvements in the business model of MaaS services, in order to realize the desired social effects that would make the transport system more equal.
1.3.2. Societal relevance
The potential societal contributions of this research are two folds. Firstly, this research raises awareness of inequalities in the Dutch transportation system. There are certain (groups of) people that are experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility for various reasons, such as their physical conditions, financial limitations, and their geographical locations. Due to the insufficient level of accessibility, it may be difficult for these individuals to participate in their desired activities, such as work, school, health care, family and friends or other leisure activities. It essentially becomes challenging to participate in society and this could result in social inequalities. The existence and consequences of these inequalities are currently underexposed. Furthermore, this research
elaborates on how these social inequalities can be addressed with MaaS. If MaaS can provide these ‘vulnerable’ group of people with a higher level of accessibility, it will have great, positive effects on society.
The findings and recommendations of this research can be used to further improve the Dutch transportation network. MaaS possesses the characteristics to potentially be of great value for the groups of people that are currently experiencing problems when accessing the transportation network. For instance, a transportation system in which you only pay for the use of transportation, instead of owning transportation, can make it cheaper and easier accessible for the poorer groups of people, as it will no longer be necessary to personally own a car. Furthermore, a more flexible and demand-responsive system like MaaS can be a far better alternative in areas where the demand for transport is low and inconsistent, which can provide a more suitable service for people living in rural
8
areas. Simultaneously, a demand-responsive and flexible service can be of better service for people who need specific and personal attention, such as the elderly and the disabled.
Finally, the societal relevance of this research is that it aims to contribute to a change in perspective {on?}. Having access to transport should be seen as a crucial precondition to participate in society. It should be considered just as important as having access to health care, housing and education. In these policy areas measures are implemented to limit inequalities and to give access to certain groups of people that would otherwise have problems acquiring these basic needs. This research contributes to this change in perspective and it strives to stress the importance of a certain level of accessibility. The transportation policy should implement similar principles based on equality and equity as observed in other crucial policy areas.
9
2. Theoretical framework
In this chapter, the relevant theoretical concept selected for this research is further elaborated.
2.1. Transport Justice and its implications to transport planning practice
Transportation planning practice was first developed in the United States in the 1950s (Martens, 2016). The practice was initially focused around solving the increasing levels of congestion, in order to ensure an effective and efficient movement of people and goods (Shiftan, Button & Nijkamp, 2007). Although transportation planning in itself has always been politicised; it involves interventions and decisions that affect different groups of people in different ways (Martens, 2016), this aspect is often disregarded. The way political interventions affect the people, and the often systematic way it negatively affects the same groups of people, is often ignored (Levine, 2013; Martens, 2016).
In responding to these gaps, researches focusing on inequalities and social inclusion in transport began to emerge (Lucas, 2011). The first study took place in the United Kingdom, where
policymakers started to be interested in the social impacts that a low level of accessibility could have (Social Exclusion Unit, 1998). In 2003, the UK Social Exclusion Unit released a report on the subject. The report provided evidence of certain economically and socially disadvantaged groups in the UK experiencing a lack of transport and consequentially becoming socially excluded (Social Exclusion Unit, 2003). Similar studies have since been undertaken in other countries to investigate the relationship between transport and social exclusion (Lucas, 2011).
The concept of Transport Justice has provided a new paradigm for transportation planning (Martens, 2016). It examines how a fair transportation system, a system that provides a sufficient level of accessibility for all under most circumstances, can be implemented. Under the concept,
transportation planning is based on principles of justice, instead of focusing on eliminating
congestion, minimizing environmental impacts or maximizing efficiency. It takes a human-centered approach, which is in contrary to the conventional practice. The key principles of justice can be found below.
10
However, there are challenges in implementing the concept in practice. For instance, a sufficient level of accessibility can be very subjective. Martens (2016), also highlights the difficulty in giving an operational definition of ‘sufficient accessibility’. A possible solution to this challenge is to develop an approach and agreement on what can be considered a sufficient level of accessibility and to come up with a sufficiency threshold. The sufficiency threshold is set up by real-life agents, independent actors who monitor and provide a rating to a person’s level of accessibility.
These real-life agents should place all people into a so-called accessibility spectrum. To be able to assess where these people should be placed, the agents can draw on the relationship between accessibility and activity participation (Martens, 2016). This means that in their analysis they would take into account the earlier explained social exclusion literature and look at possible access to education, jobs, social contacts and health care. When analyzing the accessibility level of different persons, the real-life agents will agree that the persons on the absolute bottom of the spectrum, who cannot engage in any activities, do not experience a sufficient level of accessibility (Martens, 2016).
The opposite goes for the upper end of the spectrum, where all real-life agents will agree that these persons are experiencing a sufficient level of accessibility. It is expected however that these agents will start to disagree with each other about the sufficiency of someone’s accessibility when moving closer to the center of the spectrum. In other words, this is where the subjectivity of ‘sufficient’
11
comes into play. According to Martens, the real-life agents should start with setting upper and lower boundaries, which represent the groups of people they have reached agreement on. This means that the real-life agents all agree that the people below the lower boundary do not experience sufficient accessibility, and the people above the upper boundary do experience sufficient accessibility.
Figure 1: Graphic representation of setting the boundaries of sufficiency and insufficiency range. The ‘domain of disagreement’ contains the people on which the real-life agents cannot reach an agreement (Martens, 2016).
Martens (2016) argues that this sufficiency principle should be an important factor in transportation planning. For the people in the insufficiency range, improvements in accessibility are required in virtually all cases and these improvements should be financed by a fair scheme of taxation. In other words, the focus of a government’s transportation planning should lie on investing in measures that improve the accessibility of persons experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility.
In this research, Transport Justice is used to assess the influence of existing MaaS-initiatives on the social aspects of the Dutch transportation. For a MaaS-initiative to contribute to a more equal transportation system, a certain focus must be present on the groups of people below the sufficiency threshold. Ultimately, a MaaS-initiative should raise the accessibility levels of such a group above the sufficiency threshold, providing a sufficient level of accessibility.
2.2. Social business models
The business model of an organization can highly influence its impact on society. In the following section, this research will examine different sorts of business models in order to come up with a suitable framework for a MaaS business model. This business model should embed values that will have the desired social effects on the Dutch transportation system. Chesbrough & Rosenbloom (2002) summarized the functions of a business model into six points as follows:
1. A business model articulates the value proposition, which relates to the value that is created for users by offering new technology.
2. A business model analyzes the market and determines to which users the technology could be helpful in order to generate revenue.
12
3. A business model should define the structure of the value chain within the firm required to create and distribute the offering.
4. A business model should also contain an estimation of the expected costs and potential profit of the technology.
5. A business model should describe the position of the firm within the value network, linking suppliers and customers, including identification of potential complementors and
competitors.
6. A business model should formulate a competitive strategy that would give the business an advantage over other competitors.
Above these six functions, maximizing economic profit is generally the most important value and goal embedded within such a business model. Attempts to combine this economic value with other objectives, such as social objectives can often be problematic. However, research has shown that a focus on the social side can indeed pay off, both socially and financially (Yunus et al., 2010). As observed by Joyce & Paquin (2016), there is an on-going transition in the values embedded in business models. In the early 2000s, business models were mostly focused on maximizing economic profit. However, during the latter part of the 2000s, social and environmental aspects were also being implemented in business models due to the ongoing pressure towards businesses to respond to sustainability concerns (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). In recent years it is becoming more and more common that issues such as economic and social inequalities, environmental events, material resource scarcity and energy demands are also embedded into the values of a business model (Joyce & Paquin, 2016).
This transition has led to the development of new business models (Sarasini et al., 2017). These new business models are increasingly linked with sustainability which has resulted in an increase in literature on sustainable business models (for example; Bocken, Short, Rana & Evans, 2014; Boons & Lüdeke-Freund, 2013; Stubbs & Cocklin, 2008). A sustainable business model is a tool that is used to describe and analyze the sustainable value of a business, which can be divided into the economic value, the environmental value and the social value. The sustainable business model gives an overview of the captured values and presents them to its customers and other stakeholders (Schaltegger, Hansen & Lüdeke-Freund, 2016).
There is a number of sustainable business models that focus on the social aspect in particular. Such social business models provide an alternative perspective in value capturing, as they do not focus on
13
the economic or environmental aspects of a business. Traditionally, conventional businesses focus on maximizing profit and shareholder value. A social business can be seen as a mix between these two. It looks to sufficiently cover the cost of its operation, including the invested capital but the business is driven by cause rather than profit (Yunus, 2010). Social businesses also differ from a non-profit organization, which exists solely to fulfill social objectives.
While the concept of social businesses is highly interesting, the question remains whether this concept will be applicable to future forms of MaaS. It can be expected from a new transport concept, such as MaaS, that profit-making will always be seen as an important value or the most important value. In other words, it may not be realistic to expect that a MaaS-operator will adopt a purely social business model. MaaS can work the other way around; while their initial goal may be profit-making, the characteristics of the service can potentially result in great social benefits.
However, there is another form of a social business model that could be a better fit for the value of profit-making that MaaS is striving for. For instance, the inclusive business model seeks to address inequalities in a community by focusing on the inclusion of lower-income communities, while still maintaining focus on generating profit (Michelini & Fiorentino, 2012). The exact definition of the inclusive business model can differ (Wach, 2012), but there is a general consensus that such a
business model should be a profitable business activity that also addresses the needs of the poor and other disadvantaged groups (BIF, 2011). Because of the absence of a uniform definition or framework for the inclusive business model, it is hard to use this concept as a foundation for this research. However, the core values of focusing on disadvantaged groups while making a profit should be embedded in a social business model for MaaS.
Because of the described shortcomings of social business models and inclusive business models, this research will look at other forms of business models that could form the foundation for a social MaaS business model. The earlier explained sustainable business model can provide this framework. Such a business model looks to capture value that belongs to the economic, environmental and social dimensions of sustainability (Sarasini et al., 2017). In other words, sustainable business models are still looking to maximize profit, but simultaneously seek to capture social value, making it a more realistic foundation for a business model for MaaS. Furthermore, the sustainable business model does also provide a clear framework and operationalization, as will be further explained in the following section.
2.2.1. Operationalizing a social business model canvas for MaaS
There are tools that help to design business models. One of such a tool is the business model canvas, which is used to describe, analyze and design business models (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010).
14
Traditionally, this business model canvas has always focused on the value of profit-making. However, with the rise of sustainable business models, this has changed. Joyce & Paquin (2016) have
developed a canvas for a sustainable business model, namely the triple-layered business model canvas (TLBMC).
The TLBMC adds two new layers to the classical economic layer; an environmental layer and a social layer. The key idea of the social layer of the TLBMC is to extend the original business model canvas with a stakeholder approach (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). The additional social layer looks to capture the organization’s most important social impacts that derive from its relationship with the stakeholders into nine components. It provides insight in ways to innovate a company’s business model to maximize the social value that is created.
As stated earlier in the introduction, one of the challenges of MaaS is to focus on the future users and their needs and the social dimension of the transport system. Adding a perspective to the business model that concerns all stakeholders can make sure that more attention is given to these future users, which makes Joyce & Paquin’s (2016) TLBMC an appropriate foundation for
constructing a social business model for MaaS. Following the concept of Transport Justice, values such as equality and accessibility for all should be embedded in the social business model in order to address people that are currently experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility.
The literature on sustainable business models has been examined in this research (for example; Bocken, Short, Rana & Evans, 2014; Boons & Lüdeke-Freund, 2013; Stubbs & Cocklin, 2008). The TLBMC purported by Joyce & Paquin (2016) is chosen as the framework of this study because neither of the other literature provides a canvas for a sustainable business model in their respective
researches. Furthermore, the TLBMC provides a clear separation between the three different aspects of a sustainable business model, which makes it possible to zoom in on the social aspects exclusively. It would be harder to apply this focus when using one of the other literature as a framework because in these researches the different aspects of sustainability are more intertwined.
An example of the social layer of the TLBMC is shown in Figure 2 below, filled in for Nespresso (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). This research looks to do the same for each of the cases in the case study, which will provide an overview of the social values, or lack of social values, incorporated in the social business
15
model of each MaaS-initiative. The figure also shows the position of the social layer within the TLBMC. The red frame represents this research’s focus.
Figure 2: An example of the social layer of the TLBMC, filled in for Nespresso (Joyce & Paquin, 2016).
Figure 3: The position of the social layer within the TLBMC (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). The red frame resembles this research’s focus (Joyce & Paquin, 2016).
It is important to take a deeper look into the social layer of Joyce & Paquin’s (2016) TLBMC and to further operationalize its components. The social layer of the TLBMC consists of nine different components, namely; social value, employees, governance, communities, societal culture, the scale of outreach, end-users, social impacts and social benefits (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). In the next paragraphs, a summarized description of each component is provided along with how it can be utilized in the case study of this research.
The social value in the TLBMC refers to the mission of a company to create benefits for its customers and society as a whole (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). In the case of MaaS, it is the possibility to enhance travelers’ living standard by providing them with an enhanced additional travel option. This means
16
that the MaaS-initiative provides the consumer with either 1) a more comfortable trip, 2) a cheaper trip, 3) a reduction in travel time and 4) improvement to the consumers’ accessibility. When one of these four criteria is met without significant disadvantages in one of the other areas then it can be said that the consumers’ life is enhanced.
The employee component in the TLBMC consists of the role employees have as a stakeholder and their training and development (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). This component may be challenging to address because this information may be confidential or classified. Additionally, current MaaS-initiatives are mostly small-medium sized firms, meaning that not much information is available. Still, information can be used to indirectly address this component. For example, what training is given to the employees to enable them to provide the consumer with a better service?
The governance component examines the structure of an organization and its policy regarding decision making (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). It defines stakeholders the company will identify with, and how they will do this (Mitchell, Agle & Wood, 1997). In the case of MaaS, the organization will look to identify with the future users, in order to find those who will prefer MaaS over the current transport options. MaaS-initiatives should thus analyze the groups of people for who they can provide a more suitable transport option and identify themselves with these groups. To contribute on a social level, special attention should also be given to people currently experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility.
The community component refers to the social relationships that are being built with the suppliers and the local communities (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). The relationships can be mutually beneficial and highly influence the success of an organization. In the case of MaaS, mutually beneficial relationships can be formed when a platform and a transport provider work together to set up a MaaS-initiative in a certain area that experiences accessibility problems expressed by the local community. In this case, the MaaS-platform has the available resources to provide the necessary fleet of vehicles, while the transport provider acts as a ‘launching-costumer’ and addresses the communities’
accessibility problem. The MaaS-platform expands its service area and its exposure, and thus its target audience, which makes it a mutually beneficial relationship for all stakeholders involved. The societal culture considers the way an organization manages the impact it can have on society as a whole (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). It looks at possible social threats the service can cause in the future and how they can adjust their actions to make sure that they achieve a positive influence on society. There are a few general social impacts or threats concerning MaaS that can be addressed here. Smartphone-dependency can be a threat concerning MaaS, as people with a lower income, the elderly and disabled people often either cannot afford one or are not capable of using one. At the
17
same time, it is expected that the number of the elderly in the Netherlands will increase due to the aging population. Furthermore, MaaS’ initial focus on heavily used transport lines and commuters can lead to a decreasing service along lesser used transport lines, potentially leading to isolation and social exclusion of certain groups who rely on these lesser used transport lines. When an
organization has a good societal culture, it will address these social threats by providing alternatives. The scale of outreach refers to the quality and quantity of an organization’s relationships with stakeholders. (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). This concerns how and whether an organization addresses social differences in a certain area and it analyzes its geographical impact. For a MaaS-initiative, it will be crucial to recognize and address social differences in order to help equalize the Dutch transport system. A certain focus on groups that experience an insufficient level of accessibility, being the elderly, disabled people, people in rural areas and/or people with a lower income is thus necessary.
End-users are the persons that ‘consume’ the value proposition. This component addresses how the needs of the end-user are met by the product or service (Joyce & Paquin, 2016).End-users have different needs based on their personal characteristics such as age, income, and living area. They can also be divided into groups based on these characteristics. This component looks deeper into which needs of which groups have been met, and which needs have not been met.
The social impact describes the eventual social costs of an organization (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). It is an extension of the financial costs and the environmental costs in the other two layers. Currently, there is no general agreement on what social impacts must be considered or how to quantify them. (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). With MaaS, social impacts can consider a decrease of certain groups’ accessibility levels, an increase in the gap between people with a high level of accessibility and people with a low level of accessibility or the possible isolation of certain groups of people. The component of social benefits captures the positive social value that is created (Joyce & Paquin, 2016). As with the social impacts, social benefits can be very broad and hard to measure. Concerning MaaS, the most important social impact is an increased level of accessibility. However, to be
considered as a social business model it is important that this increase of accessibility is also done for the groups of people that currently experience an insufficient level of accessibility, and not only for the people with favorable personal characteristics.
2.3. Linking Transport Justice and the Social Business Model
Next, the connection between Transport Justice and the Social Business Model Canvas will be made. In particular, I focus on how the TLBMC can be used to evaluate the social dimension of current
18
MaaS-initiatives. From the previous sections, it is apparent that certain components of the Social Business Model are in line with the principals of Transport Justice.
The most important characteristic of Transport Justice is that transportation planning should be done on principles of justice, meaning that an intervention in the transport system should aim to take away inequalities and subsequently lead to a more equal transport system. This value should therefore be embedded in the business models of MaaS-initiatives, otherwise the business model of such an initiative cannot be considered social.
Striving for a more equal transport system begins with the governance component. Here, the organization analyzes which stakeholders it is looking to identify with. According to the principles of Transport Justice, MaaS-initiatives should identify with those who experience an insufficient level of accessibility. Otherwise, improvements to the transport system and the advantages these bring are only done for the (groups of) people already experiencing a sufficient level of accessibility, which does not contribute to a more equal transport system.
Following the principles of Transport Justice, this focus on people currently experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility should then also be applied to the components of social value and the end-user. A MaaS-initiative will have social value if it enhances the lives of people using the initiative. However, when only improving the lives of people who already experience a sufficient level of accessibility, the initiative does not contribute to a more equal transport system.
This then means that considering the needs of future users cannot just be done for those who possess favorable personal characteristics, who can afford the service and who live in the right location. People who currently experience problems when trying to access the Dutch transportation system should also be considered in these parts of a social business model, as this will contribute to a more equal transportation system.
Two components of TLBMC, namely social impacts and social benefits, can be linked to Martens’ (2016) Transport Justice. For MaaS, social impacts can refer to the social costs of a MaaS-initiative. According to Martens (2016), a MaaS-initiative may not have such social costs that it results in more people experiencing insufficient levels of accessibility. At the same time, interventions in the
transport system may not result in a further reduction of the accessibility levels of those already experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility. In both cases, the interventions in the transport system are not justified.
The TLBMC component in social benefits is probably the most important link with the Transport Justice framework. The main idea of Transport Justice is to raise the accessibility levels of people
19
above the sufficiency threshold. The component of social benefits captures the positive social value that is created. The most important social benefit that is considered here is raising people’s
accessibility levels. Ideally, a MaaS-initiative raises the accessibility level of someone who before experienced a lack of accessibility and raises it above the sufficiency threshold, which would give this person a sufficient level of accessibility.
After aligning the concept of Transport Justice with the theory of the Social Business Model, a social business model canvas to assess MaaS initiatives to ensure equality within the Dutch transportation system is shown in Table 1. This canvas is used in this research to analyze the business models of current MaaS-initiatives to determine the extent of the social contribution of these initiatives.
The Social Business Model Canvas Local Communities A social MaaS-initiative works together with local residents or local authority to identify accessibility problems experienced by the local community or by certain individuals. Governance A social MaaS-initiative identifies with those who experience an insufficient level of accessibility. Social Value A social MaaS-initiative enhances people’s lives by improving the current service. The improvements to people’s lives should be felt by a broad spectrum of users, and not solely by those with favorable personal characteristics. Societal Culture A social MaaS-initiative fights social threats to reach a culture of social inclusion. End-user A social MaaS-initiative meets the needs of the end-user. But most importantly: A social MaaS-initiative meets the needs of groups experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility. Employees A social MaaS-initiative trains its employees to be of better service for its users. Scale of Outreach A social MaaS-initiative addresses social differences and analyzes its geographical impact. Social Impacts
A social MaaS-initiative may not result in: - an increase in the number of people experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility.
- A further reduction in the accessibility levels experienced by these persons.
Social Benefits
Ultimately, a social MaaS-initiative addresses the accessibility of people who initially
experienced a lack of accessibility and raises it above the sufficiency threshold. This gives these people a sufficient level of accessibility.
20
2.4. Conceptual model
The connection between the relevant theories and approaches of this research are shown in the conceptual model, which can be found below.
The Social Business Model Canvas
Local Communities A social MaaS-initiative works together with local residents or municipalities to identify accessibility problems experienced by the local community or by certain individuals. Governance A social MaaS-initiative identifies with those who experience an insufficient level of accessibility. Social Value A social MaaS-initiative enhances people’s lives by improving the current service. The improvements to people’s lives should be felt by a broad spectrum of users, and not solely by those with favorable personal characteristics. Societal Culture A social MaaS-initiative fights social threats to reach a culture of social inclusion. End-user A social MaaS-initiative meets the needs of the end-user.
But most importantly: A social MaaS-initiative meets the needs of groups experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility. Employees A social MaaS-initiative trains its employees to be of better service for its users.
Scale of Outreach A social MaaS-initiative addresses social differences and analyzes its geographical impact. Social Impacts
A social MaaS-initiative may not result in:
- an increase in the number of people experiencing an insufficient level of accessibility.
- A further reduction in the accessibility levels experienced by these persons.
Social Benefits
Ultimately, a social MaaS-initiative addresses the accessibility of people who initially experienced a lack of accessibility and raises it above the sufficiency threshold. This gives these people a sufficient level of accessibility.
Figure 4: The conceptual model of this research (Own creation). MaaS-initiative
- Flexible service (no specific route and time schedule) - On-demand
- Works with an app
- Consumer pays for the use of transport instead of ‘owning’ means of transport
Transport Justice
“An injustice is done whenever a person experiences an insufficient level of accessibility” (Martens, 2016).
A transport system can be considered ‘just’ or ‘equal’ when virtually all (groups of) people have the ability to access desired activities such as education, jobs, social contacts and health care.
21
In this research, Transport Justice is selected as an overarching framework to provide a guideline for designing and implementing transport services. Under this framework, the social business model and social business model canvas are then used as an assessment tool to aid the evaluation of MaaS services. The results of the evaluation can help to improve the design of these services as the canvas helps to quantify how the services contribute to the social dimension of the transport system. The more a MaaS-initiative complies to the social business model canvas, the more ‘social’ it is
considered and the more it contributes to an equal transportation system. The latter part of this research focuses on how MaaS-initiatives can be steered to better comply with the social business model canvas. In other words, it focuses on how a more social implementation of MaaS can be ensured, ultimately leading to an equal Dutch transportation system.
22
3. Methodology
3.1. Research strategy and methods
In the research strategy, the choices that have been made in the first stages of the research are described. The argumentation leading to these decisions and the choice of research methods will be elaborated in the following section.
This research has an inductive approach and is of a qualitative nature. It does not aim to test
hypotheses as is customary for deductive research (Gray, 2017). Instead, the acquired empirical data is analyzed in order to determine if any patterns emerge that suggest relationships between
variables, thus giving this research its inductive approach. The collection of qualitative data is first done through a literature study, in which the knowledge of other researches is gathered. Later, a case study and interviews are done in order to collect more qualitative data.
The data of the literature review provides the framework for a social business model and gives a definition of a fair transport system. The case study and interviews give more insight into how these theories work out in practice and to what extent they can be recognized in current MaaS-initiatives. This gives more insight into the desired role of the government in achieving the desired social effects of MaaS and a fair transport system. The literature review also forms the framework for the case study and interviews. It provides them with parameters of a social business model and a fair
transport system. For all these parameters, data is collected during the interviews in order to answer the research questions.
The analysis of the business models currently being adopted by existing MaaS-initiatives is done through a case study. According to Saunders (2011), a case study can be defined as: “A method for research which makes use of empirical research of a certain contemporary phenomenon with the actual context, in which different sorts of evidence are used”. During a case study, a phenomenon is researched in its natural context on location (Saunders, 2011; Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2015). A case study focuses on a limited number of research objects and it is an in-depth investigation instead of a wide research (Saunders, 2011; Vennix, 2009).
The case study consists of four cases where a form of MaaS is being implemented. For all these cases, one or two interviews are done with one of the operators to get a better image of the
MaaS-initiative, to what extent it absorbs a ‘social’ business model and how it could contribute to a fairer transportation system. The other interviews will be done with experts in the field of MaaS and with local government or consultants to learn more about the (potential) impact of MaaS and the way
23
governmental parties can steer and regulate these MaaS-initiatives to realize the desired social effects of MaaS.
The cases considered in this study are all defined as MaaS-initiatives. MaaS-initiatives are
on-demand, flexible transport services that do not follow a particular schedule or route. The starting and finishing point can be determined by the user, with some cases providing more freedom than others. All MaaS-initiatives in this study provide an app for their consumers to plan, order and pay for the trip.
There are also differences between the cases included here. They can roughly be divided into two groups. The first group consists of two MaaS-platforms. These MaaS-platforms integrate multiple modes of transport and operate within a larger area. Whim and GoAbout are examples of such MaaS-platforms. The third and fourth case (USP Campusbikes and Brengflex) cannot be considered MaaS-platforms, as they are small scale-services with a small fleet of vehicles, covering a relatively small area and providing a single mode of transport. These smaller MaaS-services do not integrate multiple modes of transport. They are just pieces of the big puzzle that MaaS is. These services are part of a MaaS-platform or are expected to be part of one in the future.
Case Function
Whim MaaS-platform
GoAbout MaaS-platform
USP Campusbikes MaaS-service
Brengflex MaaS-service
Table 3: The cases of this research’s case study.
It is highly valuable to include a MaaS-platforms, such as Whim and GoAbout, to understand the bigger picture of a fully integrated MaaS-system and its consequences. Although these two platforms are not fully operative yet in the Netherlands, the analysis of these operators can provide speculative insights. Additionally, a lot can be learned about the intentions of these projects and how they may affect people with an insufficient level of accessibility in the Netherlands. On the other hand, it is also highly valuable for this research to analyze the smaller MaaS-initiatives as these are already fully operative, which makes it possible to better analyze what the social effects of these initiatives and MaaS in general are.
MaaS is still a relatively new transport concept with a limited number of practical examples available in the Netherlands. For this reason, the combination of using operative service and
MaaS-24
platforms as cases provides this research with the useful information on the likely social consequences of a MaaS-system.
The goal of this case study is to analyze the MaaS-initiatives to determine whether, and to what extent, the MaaS-initiative adopt a social business model. The information that is gathered in the interviews will be used to fill in the business model canvas presented in the theory section. This will then be analyzed to determine to what extent the case’s business model matches the characteristics of the social business model canvas, and thus determining the social contributions of these
initiatives.
3.2. Data collection and data analysis
This research utilizes qualitative data collection methods with a case study analysis. As Verschuren & Doorewaard (2015) mention in their definition of a case study, multiple sources of evidence and multiple research methods are used. In other words, this research uses the triangulation of data (Saunders, 2011; Vennix, 2009, Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2015).
Literature study
The literature review is done to learn more about the theories behind social business models and a fair transport system, or ‘fairness’ in general. For the social business model, the scientific literature is used to identify and extract characteristics of what makes a business model social. The most
important authors of social business models are Joyce & Paquin (2016) and Yunus et al. (2010). The scientific literature of Martens (2016) is used to extract characteristics of a fair transport system, and how to achieve such a system. The characteristics of both a social business model and Transport Justice are used to assess and analyze MaaS-initiatives that are being discussed during the case study.
Interviews
I use interview techniques to collect qualitative data from relevant actors. The snowball method is used to reach interesting people to interview. This means that the respondent is asked what other persons are interesting to interview (Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2015). These interviews are semi-structured, which allows the interviewer to maintain focus on the main subject, but it gives room to drift from this focus to a topic of interest that rises during the interview (Barribal & While, 1994). The interview respondents can be divided into two different groups. The first group is linked to the case study, where the operators of four different MaaS-initiatives are interviewed. The second group consists of experts in the field of MaaS and people from local governments. These interviewees provide different perspectives and interests. The interviews with operators of MaaS-initiatives give a
25
better understanding of how MaaS-initiatives fit into the current transportation network and how they enhance the current transportation system. Furthermore, they make clear to what extent current MaaS-initiatives follow a social business model. The interviews with experts and local governments are used to determine the potential impacts of MaaS and the desired role of the government in ensuring a social implementation of MaaS.
Reference number Interviewee Organization Case
Int. 1 Jeroen Quee Sweco USP Campusbikes
Int. 2 Jacco Lammers GoAbout GoAbout/USP
Campusbikes
Int. 3 Daan Stevens Connexxion Brengflex
Int. 4 Wilco Bos Municipality Nijmegen Brengflex
Int. 5 Ralph de Jong Whim Whim
Int. 6 Robin Kleine Mobycon Expert interview
Int. 7 Wouter Le Fèvre Municipality Bilthoven USP Campusbikes
Int. 8 Robin Huizenga PTV Group Expert interview
Int. 9 Koenraad Verduyn PTV Group Expert interview
Table 4: An overview of the interviews done in this research.
3.3. Validity and reliability of the research
The validity of research can be divided into the internal and external validity. The internal validity concerns the descriptive quality of the model (Pearmain, Swanson, Kroes & Bradley, 1991). The internal validity is considered sufficient when the measuring instrument is actually measuring what it should measure (Vennix, 2011). To assure this, the characteristics of a social business model have been extracted from the literature in order to analyze to what extent the MaaS-initiative follows a social business model. For each characteristic, there will be formed several interview questions to assure that these characteristics can be evaluated adequately for the different MaaS-initiatives.
The external validity is the extent to which the results can be generalized to a larger group (Vennix, 2011). During a case study, it is difficult to have high external validity because the number of research objects is low and they are studied in depth. This makes it difficult to generalize the results and to make statements about MaaS-initiatives with different external factors.
Reliability
The reliability of the research is the extent to which it is possible to do the same research again with the same outcome (Vennix, 2011). To improve reliability, the research will consist of multiple cases instead of only one case. However, reliability is still limited, because innovative projects such as MaaS-initiatives tend to change over time due to constant technological development. Furthermore, some of the MaaS-initiatives are still in a pilot-phase or starting phase. In a few years, these projects can look completely different. They can either be upscaled in case they were a success or they might
26
not even exist anymore in case of failure. In the case of upscaling and moving further from the pilot-phase, it can be expected that the values captured in the business model have changed. In the initial phase of such a project it is likely that all attention will be on deploying the project and having people to use it. In this phase, one can imagine that economic values and the value of ‘brand awareness’ will be important, while environmental and social values might become more important during later phases of the project.
27
4. Case Study of MaaS and MaaS services in the Netherlands
In this chapter, the data collected is presented. The four cases will each be described in separate sections. In each section, I present the background information of each case and the acquired information from the case study in the social business model canvas.
4.1. Whim
4.1.1 Background information
Whim is the world’s first active MaaS-operator that integrates all modes of transport into one app. The app developed by Whim integrates taxi, public transport, shared car and shared bike services. It is possible to ‘pay per ride’ or to use a monthly subscription. Whim allows the user to plan, order and pay for all these transport modes through an app. Currently, Whim is operative in the regions of Helsinki, Antwerpen and Birmingham. The system was first introduced in Helsinki in November 2017. As of August 2018, the app already had 50.000 users in Helsinki, of which roughly 10% uses a
monthly subscription (Int. 5).
Whim is the most complete version of MaaS that currently exists. The consumer can give a starting point and their desired destination, and the app will provide them with a number of travel options to reach this destination. These options differ in time, price and comfort level depending on which (combination of) modes of transport is used. For instance, a shared car provides more comfort and is quicker, and will thus be more expensive, while a bus trip will most likely be the cheaper option. Next to paying for a single trip, Whim also has several different monthly subscriptions consumers can use. Essentially, the goal of Whim, and MaaS in general, is to make owning a car unnecessary by offering the same service level but for a lower price. The service of Whim should cover every journey.
